On Wed, 16 Apr 2008, macleod@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote (excerpted for brevity):
Thank you for responding.
>> However, one point needs to be noted very strongly. Most of the
>> firesides I attended were not really for presenting the Faith to
>> non-Baha'is (personally I dislike being called a "Seeker"). The
>> overwhelming majority of them (including the one I was asked to
>> co-present three times) were really deepening sessions for Baha'is.>4
> This certainly happens. Particularly when non-Baha'i attendees are
> rare or so regular as to know just as much as the Baha'is themselves.
> A few years ago there was a book published about how to hold
> firesides. It was excellent and its strong advice was not to invite
> Baha'is to firesides.
But my understanding was that the purpose of a fireside was precisely
to present/introduce the Faith to non-Baha'is (again, please do not
call me a seeker). Indeed, I once had a personal chat in his home with
a long-standing, experienced Baha'i, and if I recall correctly what he
said, he remarked that Shoghi Effendi said that all Baha'is should have
a(n at least informal) fireside in their homes every (Baha'i) month for
non-Baha'is. If there is a book giving advice on how to hold
firesides, I have seen no evidence of it. But what is a fireside is
for if not to present the Faith to others? From the very beginning I
was given to believe that the primary purpose of a fireside was to
present the Faith, but my experience turned out to be otherwise.
Indeed, it would not surprise me if over time, from my studies and
attendence, I knew, in an abstract and formal sense, more about the
Baha'i Faith than some of the (at lest nominally) Baha'i attendees.
>>> Among the skills taught in these study circles is
>>> how to conduct home visits to seekers, new believers or even inactive
>>> ones.
>>
>> Home visits? That is a new one to me. I never heard of such a thing
>> in my area. At least not to inquirers.
>
> I think Susan picked her words carefully here. Ruhi book two teaches
> about home visits but only in relation to deepening new believers and
> it was apparently written in a context where the Internet or even
> Baha'i books are unavailable or too expensive. I don't think the
> examples and training in the book are at all relevant to Australia and
> I assume not to America.
I have not seen/attended Book Two, so I cannot comment. However, I
have to say in all blunt frankness that I was not overall favorably
impressed with Book One (which I attended every session and
participated fully in). Different soceties have differenct
characteristics and needs. I wonder if the Universal House of Justice
is making a blunder in placing too much emphasis on Ruhi as a teaching
method everywhere on the globe.
> Also the implications of the book didn't
> reflect Australian cultural values as to the protocol of visiting
> people.
That may be also in the USA (as both are western societies of largely
British heritage). However, although I am a wretched housekeeper (:
I would not have turned down an op****tunity for a sincere visit. A
number of years ago I was dating a woman who was a lifelong Mormon. I
wanted to know more of what the Mormons really believed, so at my own
initiative I called up a local Mormon office and invited some
missionaries to call on me, with the proviso that they send someone
along of more mature years (I was old enough to be the father of most
of your knock-on-doors barely-dry-behind-the-ears types). We had a
number of pleasant sessions, although obviously in the end I did not
become a Mormon. For all the pleasant times (and I mean that
sincerely) I have had at firesides, I have appreciated the few times I
have had the op****tunity to discuss one-on-one with knowledgeable
Baha'is.
>> I fully admit that my locality
>> may not necessarily be typical, but there are supposed to be hundreds
>> of Baha'is just in my immediate suburban county, divided into various
>> communities (I wonder if they are too divided),
> They probably were but over the last half dozen years these
> communities have been amalgamated into clusters. The communities
> still exist and are the legal structure of the Faith but all teaching
> and deepening is really done at the cluster. The development of
> clusters was/is an evolution rather than fiat. In your area the
> cluster may scarcely be functioning yet but in other areas the cluster
> is the be all and end all.
There are clusters in this area, but I honestly don't know what their
signficance is. Strictly as an aside, while it comes to mind, I recall
one evening when I was at a fireside. During the chitchat before the
presentation, a visitor asked what community I was part of. His
apparent assumption was that if I was there, I must be a Baha'i. That
is the sort of issue I have had with firesides.
> No I don't think your area is atypical but you may have missed how
> rapidly the Faith is changing.
Nevertheless, I live in a suburban county of approximately one and a
half million population with (supposedly) hundreds of Baha'is. What
does it take to be "typical" in a western country?
--
Paul Bartlett
|
